Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 1 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
100/100 · AStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
16S amplicon profiling of Drosophila melanogaster-associated microbiota via Illumina MiSeq, producing 3.9 million reads with moderate quality (92.6% Q20, 92.1% Q30) but notably elevated 6.315% N-content, an anomaly for amplicon sequencing. Characterizes fruit fly holobiont microbial symbionts; the high N proportion suggests possible adapter contamination or incomplete trimming and requires preprocessing validation. The 56.8% GC and read depth support community composition analysis if N-rich reads are filtered, but warrants investigation of library preparation quality.
The A grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published amplicon thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0